The institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin for effective management of water resources

ABSTRACT

Water scarcity in the region underscores the urgent need for effective management of the Kura-Aras River Basin, emphasizing the critical role it plays in ensuring sustainable water access and security for all riparian states. The research on the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin holds significant importance in advancing academic understanding and informing policy decisions regarding effective water resource management in transboundary river basins. During a semi-structured interview with field experts from riparian states, the consensus highlighted the significance of institutionalizing the Kura-Aras River Basin for effective water resource management. Field experts from basin countries highlighted the importance of establishing robust governance mechanisms as a strength, fostering cooperation, enhancing transparency, and mitigating conflicts among riparian states in the region. In contrast, the lack of trust between riparian states emerged as a significant weakness, exacerbating the deprivation of the Kura-Aras River Basin and contributing to underdevelopment.

KEYWORDS:

• Water
• water management
• institutionalization
• Kura-Aras
• SWOT

1. Introduction

Water scarcity, along with other water risks like floods, pollution, etc., poses a critical challenge in the Kura-Aras River Basin, exacerbated by various factors such as population growth, climate change, and inefficient water management practices. As one of the most important river basins in the South Caucasus region, the Kura-Aras River Basin sustains diverse ecosystems and supports the livelihoods of millions of people across Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Iran, and Turkey. However, the basin faces significant water scarcity issues, with competition rather than collaboration for water resources intensifying due to increasing demand from agriculture, industry, and domestic use (Klaphake and Kramer 2011). The reliance of riparian states on the Kura-Aras River Basin is profound, yet competition and the nature of inter-state relations significantly influence the effectiveness of utilizing this transboundary water resource (Vener and Campana 2010, Klaphake and Kramer 2011, Campana et al. 2012). In this context, effective transboundary management through institutionalization emerges as paramount. International river basin organizations’ roles and aims range from facilitative to those that allow them to act independently (Lautze et al. 2013). River basin organizations offer a framework for frequent meetings and communication among member countries, along with procedures for participating in collective decision-making (Milman and Gerlak 2020). Establishing robust institutional frameworks for cooperation and governance is crucial for addressing shared water challenges, promoting equitable access to water resources, mitigating conflicts, and ensuring the sustainable management of water within the basin (Stoa 2015). Through collaborative efforts and coordinated action among riparian states, institutionalization can facilitate the implementation of integrated water management strategies, foster dialogue and negotiation, and promote collective solutions to the complex water challenges faced by the Kura-Aras River Basin.

The research explores how successful institutionalization efforts in other transboundary river basins can provide valuable insights for application in the context of the Kura-Aras River Basin, while also examining how transboundary issues and conflicts impact the institutionalization process of water resources management within the basin. By delving into the experiences of other river basins where effective institutional frameworks have been established like the Mekong River Basin (Southeast Asia) or International Rhine Commission (Europe)¹, this study aims to extract valuable insights and lessons that could inform the development of sustainable water management practices in the Kura-Aras River Basin context. Additionally, the research seeks to shed light on the challenges posed by transboundary issues and conflicts, understanding their implications for the establishment and functioning of institutional structures governing water resources within the basin. Through this dual investigation, the research endeavors to contribute to a deeper understanding of how institutionalization efforts can be tailored to address the unique complexities (like those affected by multi-armed conflicts (Hajihoseini 2023)) of the Kura-Aras River Basin while navigating the realities of transboundary dynamics. Utilizing SWOT analysis is well-suited in this case as it provides a comprehensive framework to assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats inherent in the institutionalization of water management in the Kura-Aras River Basin, facilitating informed decision-making and strategic planning. Future research could focus on evaluating the long-term effectiveness and adaptation of institutional structures implemented in the Kura-Aras River Basin, considering evolving socio-political dynamics and climate change impacts on water resource management.

The research is structured into eight distinct parts, each serving a crucial role in elucidating its objectives and findings. Initially, the introduction sets the stage, providing a concise overview of the study's purpose and significance. Moving forward, the literature review scrutinizes existing scholarship, identifying gaps. Establishing a theoretical framework centerd on institutionalization with a methodological approach follows, delineating the strategies employed to gather and analyze data effectively. Subsequently, the Kura-Aras River Basin is introduced as a case study, furnishing essential background information to contextualize subsequent analyses. Relations and behavior of riparian states are explored in detail, building upon the foundation laid in the preceding sections. Material analysis is conducted through a comprehensive SWOT analysis, offering insights into the basin's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Proposed institutional structure and recommendations emerge as pivotal components, presenting actionable measures to address identified challenges. Ultimately, the conclusion synthesizes key findings, underscores the research's contributions, and outlines avenues for future exploration and development.

Now, research delves into the literature review to contextualize and analyze existing scholarship relevant to the institutionalization of water resource management in transboundary river basins, including insights into successful approaches and challenges faced in similar contexts.

2. Literature review

Although the scientific literature on transboundary waters has concentrated on a variety of high-profile topics ranging from conflict to cooperation, comprehensive research of differences in the missions of transboundary basin institutions has been largely disregarded. The literature review extensively examines the pivotal importance and multifaceted role of international river basin organizations in facilitating the effective management of transboundary water resources, drawing from diverse cases and contexts worldwide. Furthermore, it specifically evaluates the relevance and applicability of these insights within the unique circumstances of the Kura-Aras River Basin, shedding light on the challenges and opportunities inherent in transboundary water governance in this region.

Researchers, international institutions, and countries recognize international water resource structures as critical actors in conflict prevention and collaboration (Mitchell and Hensel 2007, Wolf 2007, Fischhendler 2008, Sant'Anna and Ribeiro 2014, Milman and Gerlak 2020, Rieu-Clarke 2020, Abdi et al. 2023). There is consensus on the necessity of creating efficient and productive institutions that foster water management across multiple political dimensions, involving global participation, and as a multi-scalar process that can be approached from both top-down and bottom-up perspectives (Schmeier 2013, Jaspers and Gupta 2014, Woodhouse and Muller 2017). Despite differences in international river basin organization varieties that may have significant implications for transboundary water resource management, there has been little systematic research on how their structure and duties differ (Lautze et al. 2013). Several studies (e.g. Rangeley et al. 1994, UNECA 2000, Makin et al. 2004, Delli Priscoli 2009) have contrasted institutions across various transboundary river basins, but these papers do not classify international river basin organizations or systematically analyze variation in their structures and mandates. International river basin typologies can be found in Hooper (2006), Bakker (2006), and Millington et al. (2006). Institutional investigation, which examines the design of international structures as well as the impacts of certain designs on the efficiency of environmental institutions, has offered significant insights into the examination of institutional design features, with a particular emphasis on the number of countries involved in a multilateral organization (Koremenos et al. 2001, Mitchell and Keilbach 2001), the number of topics that these organizations concentrate on (Koremenos et al. 2001), the technique used for resolving any conflicts among involved actors (Keohane et al. 2000, Koremenos 2008), and the processes by which choices are made among the organization's participants (Underdal 2008, Blake and Payton 2009).

Necessaries for efficient basin management were discussed by Burton and Molden (2005), Hooper (2005), Hooper and Kranz (2009), and Cantor et al. (2018). Schulze and Schmeier (2012) evaluated river basin organizations’ ability to adjust to shifts by analyzing institutional mechanisms and managerial practices implemented by the individual institutions to react to changing conditions in the basins. The presence of effective river basin institutions and agreements influences institutional capacity in a basin (Delli Priscoli and Wolf 2009), however other elements, like the basin's geopolitical linkages, must also be addressed (Zeitoun and Mirumachi 2008). Lautze et al. (2013) examined the variety of international river basin institutions in transboundary river basins, including their kind, agreement, and distribution, as well as how these elements influence basin rules. From the institutionalism of the specific river basins, Sokhem et al. (2011) present novel schemes with (re)designing concepts and performance criteria for a regional cooperative mechanism, focusing on the Mekong River Basin. The Mekong River Basin, like the Kura-Aras River Basin, faces challenges such as water scarcity, population growth, and the need for effective transboundary water management. Both basins also share complexities arising from historical disputes, stakeholder mistrust, and the imperative for sustainable resource utilization amidst changing environmental conditions. Espíndola and Ribeiro (2020) investigate this institutional architecture by detailing the elements of cooperative agreements formed under treaties as a method of assessing how the operation of water management takes place amongst riparian nations in the La Plata River Basin.

There have been very few studies on water management in the Kura-Aras River Basin. Klaphake and Kramer 2011 noted the basin's rather precarious situation in terms of political ties among riparian countries. De Stefano et al. (2012) researched climate change and assessed the hydropolitical dynamics related to climate-induced water variability in 24 transboundary basins. They stated that, despite the Kura-Aras basin is now at moderate danger of hydropolitical pressure due to water supply, it will increase to high risk by 2050. Ahmadi et al. (2023) identified a substantial link between collaboration over water in the Kura-Aras River Basin and the armed conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Stoa (2015) examined the barriers to collaboration in the Kura-Aras River Basin, as well as the chances to enhance it. Hajihoseini et al. (2023) evaluated the present condition and developments of these relationships in terms of collaboration and disputes, as well as their potential future in the Aras River Basin. Their TWINS research conjectured that 70% of water actions were non-politicized or politicized, indicating that the basin had a generally favorable collaborative status. Zanatta and Alvi (2024) evaluated and contrasted the main water governance theories, examining potential diplomatic results between Armenia and Azerbaijan in collaboration with the other neighboring states – Georgia, Russia, Turkey, and Iran – to create effective collaboration over transboundary water resources. Sakal (2022) examined the hydropower development project in the Kura-Aras River Basin initiated by the government of Turkey and discussed the impact of the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war on regional collaboration issues. Klaphake and Kramer (2011), Campana et al (2012), and Vener and Campana (2010) discuss the competition over water among riparian states and hydropolitics in the Kura-Aras River Basin. De Stefano et al. (2012) conducted a study on climate change impacts, focusing on evaluating hydropolitical tensions arising from water variability across 24 transboundary basins. According to their findings, the Kura–Aras River Basin currently faces moderate hydropolitical stress due to water availability, but it is projected to escalate to high risk by the year 2050.

Within the realm of literature exploring the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin for the efficient management of water resources, a notable gap emerges. Existing works have provided valuable insights into various aspects of water management in the region, including hydrology, political dynamics, and environmental challenges. However, there remains a distinct absence of comprehensive studies focusing specifically on the institutional frameworks governing water resource management in the Kura-Aras River Basin. This research aims to address this gap by delving into the intricacies of institutional mechanisms and their effectiveness in promoting sustainable water governance. By conducting a thorough analysis of existing institutional structures, policy frameworks, and stakeholder engagements, this study seeks to offer novel perspectives and practical recommendations for enhancing the management of water resources in the Kura-Aras River Basin. Through empirical investigations and theoretical synthesis, this research endeavors to contribute significantly to the existing body of literature while providing valuable insights

The research now shifts its focus to examining the theoretical aspects of institutionalization, aiming to elucidate its significance and implications for effective water resource management in the Kura-Aras River Basin.

3. Institutionalization and qualitative methodology

Water management techniques in the majority of states throughout the world have traditionally been inadequate and pursued to remain so (Biswas 2011). Increasing institutionalization boosts adaptive capacity, defined as the capability of systems, institutions, humans, and other organisms to adapt to potential harm, exploit opportunities, or address consequences effectively (Hassan et al. 2005). The institutionalization of river basin management can be described as the ‘politics of scale,’ involving the establishment of a new level of governance through political negotiations (Houdret et al. 2014).Institutionalization is critical in resolving the complexity of water resource management, especially in transboundary river basins such as the Kura-Aras River Basin. Institutionalization establishes defined institutions, procedures, and agreements among riparian governments, promoting fair and sustainable water resource sharing. Certain field experts claim that the establishment of river basin organizations does not always ensure long-term conflict-free ties between member states, especially as modifications to the environment in shared watercourses sometimes result in the (re-)emergence of disputes. Dispute-resolution mechanisms have thus been identified as a crucial element of maintaining long-term stable collaboration (Ochoa-Ruiz 2005, Dinar 2008, Zawahri 2008) and assisting river basins in adapting to change (Wolf et al. 2003). In the context of the Kura-Aras River Basin, institutionalization could entail the establishment of formal frameworks, agreements, and a shared river basin organization among riparian countries to collaboratively manage water resources. Institutionalization in the Kura-Aras River Basin holds the potential to address the equitable distribution of water needs and scarcities among riparian states through several key mechanisms. Firstly, establishing comprehensive institutional frameworks can facilitate transparent and fair allocation of water resources based on principles of equity and efficiency. By defining clear rights and responsibilities for water users and stakeholders, institutionalization can prevent unilateral actions and conflicts over water access, ensuring that all riparian states have a voice in decision-making processes. Additionally, robust governance structures can enable coordinated management strategies, such as water-sharing agreements and coordinated reservoir operations, to optimize water utilization and mitigate the impacts of scarcity.

In doing a study of the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin for successful water resource management, a mixed-method approach including both qualitative and quantitative approaches is required. Data on different water policies were obtained from the official sites of relevant state departments and agencies. The study also draws on previous research on water policy and papers made by international organizations such as the United Nations. Furthermore, media stories and pertinent statistics were collected to gather data regarding national water mixes and water policy-related legislative acts. Another source of information for the water events was the International Water Event Database, which was developed by Oregon State University. An interview with country specialists provided additional sources for policy evaluation. I conducted a semi-structured interview with experts from riparian states in January and February 2024 to gain insights into the complex dynamics of water resource management in the region. I selected 8 field experts from the basin countries who specialized in international relations, water management, and other relevant subjects based on their profound knowledge of the respective topics. I meticulously categorized and condensed the collected data, ensuring it was streamlined and prepared for in-depth analysis.

The present work uses the Kura-Aras River Basin as a case study. Employing a case study approach in qualitative methodology enables a comprehensive investigation into a specific phenomenon or context, providing valuable insights into its intricate details and complexities. Using the Kura-Aras River Basin as a case study to investigate the institutionalization of water resource management makes sense for a number of reasons. To begin, the Kura-Aras River Basin covers several nations, including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, and Turkey, making it an ideal case study for investigating transboundary water governance issues. Understanding how institutions are founded and operate in such complicated geopolitical circumstances is critical for global water management success. Second, the Kura-Aras River Basin confronts considerable water difficulties, including shortage, pollution, and competing demands from agriculture, industry, and urbanization. Analyzing the institutional frameworks via the SWOT approach in existence might shed light on how existing governance mechanisms solve or worsen these difficulties.

SWOT analysis is commonly used in business management challenges, but it has only lately gained popularity in water resource management and environmental issues (Kallioras et al. 2010). The SWOT analysis framework is ideal for investigating this qualitative research, as it systematically evaluates the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats inherent in the basin's institutionalization process, providing a comprehensive understanding of its internal dynamics and external context. To begin, this strategy enables a comprehensive evaluation of the internal strengths and weaknesses of each riparian country's existing structures. Stakeholders can get a sophisticated view of the present landscape by recognizing strengths like established legal frameworks or joint initiatives, as well as shortcomings like ineffective enforcement mechanisms or organizational capacity shortages. Furthermore, the SWOT analysis helps to identify external opportunities and threats, such as the possibility for regional collaboration or the influence of climate change on water supply. Understanding these elements is critical for developing successful tactics for seizing opportunities and mitigating dangers. Furthermore, the SWOT model promotes stakeholder participation and cooperation by encouraging a participatory approach to issue resolution, which allows various viewpoints to be addressed when developing strong water governance solutions.

The complex political and socio-economic dynamics among the riparian states may pose challenges in obtaining unbiased information or conducting impartial analysis. I employed diverse data sources and engaged with multiple stakeholders from various sectors to mitigate bias and ensure a comprehensive and balanced analysis. The research was conducted in strict adherence to ethical guidelines, ensuring the protection of participants’ rights and confidentiality throughout the study.

The study now transitions to providing background information on the Kura-Aras River Basin, elucidating its geographical, hydrological, and socio-economic characteristics as foundational knowledge for the forthcoming case study analysis.

4. Kura-Aras River Basin

The Kura-Aras River Basin is the largest river network in the South Caucasus. Both major rivers of the basin originate in Turkey and stream into the Caspian Sea after meeting in Azerbaijan. Almost two-thirds of the 188,200 km2 basin area, or around 122,200 km2, lies in the three South Caucasus states, with the remainder in Turkey and Iran (Campana et al. 2012). A large portion of the population residing in the Kura-Aras River Basin comprises some of the most economically disadvantaged communities in the region, whose livelihoods and well-being are intricately tied to the waters of the basin.² These marginalized communities rely heavily on the resources provided by the river basin for their sustenance, including water for drinking, irrigation, and other essential needs, making their dependence on its waters critical for their survival and socio-economic development. The Southern Caucasus states view this watershed as a crucial shared resource with its management posing a security concern. For instance, Georgia relies on it primarily for agricultural purposes, while Armenia depends on it for both agricultural and industrial needs (Campana and Vener 2013). Moreover, in Azerbaijan, the Kura and Aras Rivers are pivotal as they supply roughly half of the drinking water and 60% of the irrigation water required for agriculture (Zeeb 2010).

The management of the Kura-Aras River Basin has never been collectively addressed in terms of establishing regulations and embracing international standards. Additionally, the proliferation of large-scale dam projects, combined with the escalating impacts of climate change, has intensified tensions among the countries within the basin (Alipour 2023). These complexities persist due to unresolved political conflicts dating back to the Soviet era, which continue to shape institutional and legal frameworks, as well as efforts in water management and cooperation. Cooperation across borders regarding shared water resources remains limited, with competition among nations for exploiting these resources for economic advancement impeding the development of effective multilateral agreements and the adoption of sustainable frameworks for managing transboundary waters.

The Kura River spans 1,515 kilometers, traversing through Georgia and Azerbaijan before emptying into the Caspian Sea. Its tributaries, originating from the Greater Caucasus mountains, receive substantial input from both seasonal and continuous snowmelt. On the other hand, the Aras River stretches 1,072 kilometers and serves as the border between Turkey and Iran to the south, as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan to the north. Eventually, it veers northward and merges with the Kura River shortly before reaching the Caspian Sea. Dams have been constructed along both rivers, with the largest located at Mingachevir and this reservoir boasts a storage capacity of 15.7 cubic kilometers, nearly equivalent to the annual flow of the Kura River following its merger with the Aras River.³ These dams serve purposes such as hydropower generation and irrigation, aiding in the regulation of river flow.

The basin, which is the principal supply of freshwater for Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan, as well as a considerable source for Turkey and Iran, is located in the heart of a complicated geopolitical region. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Kura-Aras River Basin has not been controlled under a collaborative management agreement, and it is still one of the most major watercourses without a transboundary agreement (Stoa 2015). The Kura-Aras River Basin presents a complex interplay of collaboration and competition among the countries it intersects. On one hand, its ample water resources offer promising avenues for cooperation across sectors like agriculture, industry, and energy production.⁴ Through shared water management initiatives, joint infrastructure projects, and agreements on water allocation, there's potential for mutual benefits like optimizing agriculture output or energy production and bolstered regional stability. However, competition emerges due to varying interests and priorities among the riparian states. Disputes over water usage, hydropower development, and environmental concerns strain relations and heighten tensions. Geopolitical factors and historical grievances further complicate matters, intensifying the competition for control over the basin's resources. The lack of adequate development in frameworks and mechanisms across numerous global basins presents a risk that both riparian countries and the international community must tackle (Schmeier 2024). In several scientific studies, the Kura-Aras River Basin was referred to as a ‘basin at risk’ (Wolf et al. 2003) due to the complex and somewhat unstable political connections between the riparian countries, as well as the massive water quantity and quality concerns within the basin. AQUEDUCT, utilizing state-of-the-art data to identify and assess water risks globally, reveals that the majority of areas in the Kura-Aras River Basin is categorized as medium-high (2-3 out of 5) and high (3-4 out of 5). This database indicates that the majority of categories within AQUEDUCT's water risk calculator, including Drought Risk, Untreated Connected Wastewater, and Unimproved/No Sanitation, are predominantly classified as medium-high to high in this basin.⁶ To navigate these dynamics effectively, it's imperative to prioritize sustainable cooperation and conflict mitigation. This entails implementing robust transboundary water governance mechanisms, fostering transparent communication channels, and establishing equitable resource-sharing agreements. By doing so, the collaborative potential of the Kura-Aras River Basin can be maximized while managing competitive pressures with prudence.

The Kura-Aras River Basin holds immense positive potential for the riparian states and the broader region. Its abundant water resources serve as a vital lifeline for agricultural development, providing irrigation for crops and sustaining livelihoods.⁷ Furthermore, the basin's hydroelectric potential presents opportunities for clean energy generation, contributing to the region's energy security and reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Beyond economic benefits, the river basin fosters ecological diversity and supports unique ecosystems, providing habitat for diverse flora and fauna (Abbasov and Flores 2023). Effective water resource management in the Kura-Aras River Basin is anticipated to yield a myriad of socio-economic and environmental benefits, which will be distributed among various stakeholders. Improved water security will ensure reliable access to water for agriculture, industry, and domestic use, enhancing food and livelihood security for riparian communities. Furthermore, sustainable water management will foster economic growth by supporting irrigated agriculture, hydropower generation, navigation, and other economic activities dependent on water resources. Investments in water infrastructure will create employment opportunities and stimulate economic growth in both rural and urban areas. Equitable distribution of water resources will benefit marginalized communities, reducing socio-economic disparities and enhancing social cohesion within the basin. Environmentally, effective management will preserve and restore aquatic ecosystems, improve water quality, enhance climate resilience, and mitigate flood risks. These benefits will be distributed among different stakeholders including governments, local communities, the private sector, civil society, and the international community, all contributing to the basin's sustainable development and resilience.

The research pivots towards examining the relations and behavior of riparian states within the Kura-Aras River Basin.

5. Relations and behavior of riparian states

The relations and behavior of riparian states play a pivotal role in shaping the effective use and management of resources within the Kura-Aras River Basin. Cooperative interactions among these states can facilitate the development of joint water management strategies, infrastructure projects, and equitable resource-sharing agreements, enhancing the basin's sustainability. Conversely, strained relations and adversarial behavior may impede collaboration, leading to conflicts over water allocation, hydropower development, and environmental degradation. Historical grievances, geopolitical tensions, and divergent national interests can further complicate matters, exacerbating challenges related to water governance and resource management. Therefore, fostering positive diplomatic relations, promoting transparent communication channels, and cultivating a spirit of cooperation among riparian states are essential for addressing these issues effectively.

Water scarcity, especially exacerbated by climate change, poses significant challenges in the Kura-Aras River Basin, profoundly impacting transboundary water management and institutionalization efforts. Decreased precipitation, shifting weather patterns, and rising temperatures have led to reduced water availability, intensifying competition among riparian states for limited resources. As water becomes scarcer, tensions escalate, exacerbating existing conflicts and hindering cooperative efforts towards effective resource management. Furthermore, the unpredictability of water availability exacerbates the vulnerability of communities dependent on the basin for agriculture, industry, and domestic use, exacerbating socio-economic disparities and heightening the risk of water-related conflicts. Inadequate institutional frameworks and governance mechanisms further compound these challenges, as they struggle to adapt to the evolving complexities of climate-induced water scarcity. Without robust transboundary cooperation and effective institutionalization, addressing the impacts of water scarcity in the Kura-Aras River Basin will remain a daunting task, with far-reaching consequences for regional stability, environmental sustainability, and socio-economic development.

The armed conflicts, particularly those between Armenia and Azerbaijan, have profoundly impacted the effective use and management issues within the Kura-Aras River Basin, including its institutionalization (Ahmadi et al. 2023, Hajihoseini et al. 2023, Zanatta and Alvi 2024). These conflicts have disrupted collaborative efforts and strained relations between the riparian states, hindering the development of comprehensive institutional frameworks for water governance. As a consequence of the armed conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Armenia's collaboration with Azerbaijan and Turkey in accessing and utilizing transboundary water resources has been significantly hindered. The conflict has heightened distrust and strained diplomatic relations between the countries, impeding effective cooperation on water management issues. This lack of collaboration exacerbates challenges related to equitable access and sustainable use of transboundary water resources in the region. Scarce resources and attention diverted to military expenditures have led to neglect in investing in water infrastructure and sustainable management practices. Moreover, the instability resulting from armed conflicts has deterred foreign investment and hindered international cooperation initiatives aimed at addressing transboundary water challenges. The lack of trust and ongoing territorial disputes have further complicated efforts to establish robust institutional mechanisms for resource management and dispute resolution, according to certain field experts. Consequently, the absence of effective institutionalization exacerbates existing tensions and perpetuates a cycle of conflict and insecurity, impeding progress towards sustainable water management in the Kura-Aras River Basin.

Iran has recently engaged in water-related activities with both Armenia and Azerbaijan, particularly concerning the utilization of water from the Aras River.⁸ These endeavors signify Iran's proactive approach to addressing its water needs and fostering regional cooperation. However, amidst these efforts, geopolitical struggles, particularly with Azerbaijan, have exerted a significant impact on the relations between riparian states and transboundary governance within the Kura-Aras River Basin. Like tensions between Iran with Azerbaijan, it also arises with Turkey as well due to conflicting interests over water allocation in the Aras River (Hajihoseini et al. 2023). Both countries heavily rely on the river for various purposes, including irrigation, domestic use, and hydropower generation. However, differing priorities and demands lead to disagreements regarding the equitable distribution of water resources. Iran, situated downstream of Turkey, often contends with reduced water availability due to upstream water abstraction and dam constructions by Turkey, exacerbating water scarcity issues within its territory. Georgia maintains diplomatic ties with neighboring countries within the Kura-Aras River Basin, focusing on water-related cooperation. Collaborative efforts with Azerbaijan involve agreements on water resource management, fostering mutual benefits and regional stability.⁹ Similarly, Georgia engages in dialogue with Armenia and Turkey to address shared water challenges, emphasizing sustainable utilization and equitable distribution of transboundary rivers for the collective prosperity of the region.¹⁰

The research now transitions to the empirical findings section, delving into the results and discussions derived from the SWOT analysis, elucidating the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats inherent in the institutionalization of water management in the Kura-Aras River Basin.

6. SWOT – results

6.1. Strengths

The institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin boasts strengths derived from its comprehensive approach to data sharing and monitoring, according to field experts and various data sources. This robust data infrastructure not only enhances water management practices but also fosters informed decision-making for sustainable development initiatives. Formal institutions facilitate the exchange of information, expertise, and best practices among stakeholders.¹¹ This promotes learning and innovation, enabling more efficient and adaptive management strategies in response to environmental challenges, such as climate change and water scarcity. Shared goals serve as a remarkable strength of the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin, fostering collaboration among riparian states towards sustainable water management and environmental protection. By aligning objectives and priorities, stakeholders can work together more effectively, leveraging collective efforts to address common challenges and achieve mutually beneficial outcomes. The institutionalization promotes enhanced cooperation among stakeholders, including governmental bodies, local communities, and international organizations, fostering dialogue and consensus-building for shared water resource management goals (Offutt 2022). Ultimately, through its emphasis on collaboration, data-driven decision-making, and stakeholder engagement, the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin stands as a beacon of sustainable development, paving the way for effective water resource management and environmental stewardship in the region. Formal institutional structures can attract funding from various sources, including government budgets, international organizations, and private-sector partnerships. This financial support can be utilized for infrastructure development, conservation efforts, and research initiatives within the basin.

Field experts and other sources claim that the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin demonstrates significant strengths in disaster risk reduction. By harnessing the expertise of hydrologists, geologists, and disaster management specialists, alongside data from satellite imagery, weather forecasts, and historical records, the initiative enables proactive identification of vulnerable areas and early warning systems for potential hazards such as floods or landslides. Furthermore, capacity-building initiatives empower local communities and governmental agencies with the skills and resources necessary to effectively respond to disasters and implement risk reduction strategies. International support and funding further strengthen these efforts, enabling the implementation of large-scale infrastructure projects, training programs, and knowledge exchange initiatives. Through its multifaceted approach, the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin serves as a model for effective disaster risk reduction, fostering resilience and sustainable development in the face of environmental challenges.

6.2. Weakness

Along with its strengths, the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin also faces certain weaknesses that could hinder its effectiveness in sustainable management. Historical conflicts and a lack of trust among riparian states as a significant weakness according to field experts, pose significant challenges, stemming from longstanding disputes over water rights and resource allocation. These tensions are exacerbated by political disputes, both within and between countries, which can impede collaborative efforts towards sustainable basin management. Recent hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2020 further complicate the situation, creating barriers to dialogue and cooperation.¹² Additionally, bureaucratic red tape within institutional frameworks can slow down decision-making processes and hamper the implementation of integrated management plans.

While establishing formal institutions is essential, the absence of robust legal mechanisms can limit their effectiveness in managing water resources and resolving disputes, regarding empirical data. Most field experts think that without clear regulations and enforcement mechanisms, stakeholders may struggle to adhere to common guidelines, leading to uncoordinated actions and potential conflicts. Moreover, a lack of technical capacity among institutions and stakeholders can impede their ability to monitor and assess the health of the basin, implement sustainable practices, and respond to emerging challenges such as pollution and climate change.

6.3. Opportunities

Strong trust and willingness among stakeholders can transform threats into opportunities for collaborative problem-solving and streamlined decision-making within the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin. The institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin presents several opportunities that can significantly enhance its management and sustainability. Firstly, it offers the opportunity for transboundary collaboration among riparian states, fostering diplomatic relations and cooperation to address shared challenges such as water scarcity, pollution, and ecosystem degradation. Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) can be effectively implemented within institutional frameworks, allowing for holistic approaches to basin management that consider the interconnectedness of water resources, land use, and ecosystems, according to certain field experts. Additionally, the integration of technology, such as remote sensing, data analytics, and water monitoring systems, presents opportunities to enhance monitoring, decision-making, and early warning systems, thereby improving efficiency and effectiveness in water resource management. Moreover, institutionalization provides a platform to address climate resilience by implementing adaptation measures, such as water conservation strategies, flood management infrastructure, and ecosystem restoration, to mitigate the impacts of climate change on the basin's ecosystems and communities.¹³ By capitalizing on these opportunities, the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin can pave the way for sustainable development and resilience in the face of environmental challenges.

Some field experts claim that by involving local communities, NGOs, and other stakeholders in decision-making processes, institutions can harness diverse perspectives and knowledge, fostering a sense of ownership and accountability towards sustainable basin management. Moreover, institutional frameworks create opportunities for investment and funding, attracting financial resources from governmental budgets, international organizations, and private-sector partnerships. This influx of funding can be utilized to implement infrastructure projects, conservation initiatives, and capacity-building programs within the basin. Furthermore, institutionalization facilitates knowledge exchange and learning through collaboration among stakeholders, enabling the sharing of best practices, research findings, and innovative solutions to common challenges. Finally, the establishment of clear governance structures and regulatory frameworks can stimulate economic development within the basin, creating opportunities for sustainable livelihoods, tourism, and ecosystem services that benefit local communities and promote regional prosperity. By capitalizing on these opportunities, the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin can pave the way for inclusive, resilient, and economically vibrant water management practices.

6.4. Threats

Finally, let's explore the threats facing the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin in more detail. Climate change impacts present a formidable threat, with rising temperatures, altered precipitation patterns, and increased frequency of extreme weather events posing risks to water availability, ecosystem health, and community resilience within the basin, according to the consensus among field experts. Water scarcity exacerbates these challenges, as growing demand for water resources, coupled with declining water quality and availability due to climate variability and human activities, threatens to exacerbate conflicts and undermine socio-economic development. Pollution and contamination further compound these issues, as industrial discharge, agricultural runoff, and inadequate wastewater treatment degrade water quality, endangering human health and ecosystem integrity. Moreover, transboundary disputes over water rights, resource allocation, and infrastructure development pose significant obstacles to collaborative management efforts, perpetuating tensions and impeding progress towards shared goals of sustainable basin management.

Infrastructure vulnerability poses a significant risk, as ageing or poorly maintained infrastructure such as dams, levees, and irrigation systems are susceptible to failure, leading to flooding, water shortages, and disruptions in water supply (Abbasov et al. 2022). Economic pressures further compound these challenges, as competing demands for water resources from agriculture, industry, and urban development strain the basin's ecosystems and exacerbate resource depletion, regarding to the consensus among field experts. Additionally, ecological degradation, including habitat loss, species decline, and water pollution, threatens the biodiversity and ecological integrity of the basin, compromising ecosystem services essential for human well-being and socio-economic development.¹⁴

With increasing scrutiny, current research endeavors are now shifting towards the examination of the proposed institutional structure and recommendations for enhancing water resource management within the Kura-Aras River Basin.

7. Proposed institutional structure and recommendations

This part emphasizes strengths and opportunities identified through comprehensive analysis, drawing lessons from successful initiatives in other transboundary river basins. By addressing weaknesses and threats, the proposed structure aims to leverage them into strengths and opportunities, fostering collaborative governance, enhancing resilience, and promoting sustainable development within the Kura-Aras River Basin. Lessons drawn from similar initiatives in other transboundary river basins such as the Mekong River Commission over the Mekong River Basin offer valuable insights to inform institutionalization efforts in the Kura-Aras River Basin. These lessons emphasize the critical importance of cooperation among riparian states, highlighting the need for open dialogue, trust-building measures, and mutual benefits to overcome political tensions and achieve shared water management goals. Additionally, effective institutionalization requires clear legal frameworks and institutional mechanisms tailored to the specific context of the basin, including joint institutions, agreements, and dispute-resolution mechanisms. Inclusive stakeholder engagement, integrating diverse perspectives from governments, local communities, civil society, and the private sector, is essential for fostering ownership, transparency, and accountability in decision-making processes. Adopting an integrated approach to water resources management, considering social, economic, and environmental dimensions, enhances resilience and sustainability. Flexible and adaptive management strategies, supported by technical cooperation and capacity building, enable riparian states to navigate uncertainties and changing conditions effectively (Sendzimir et al. 2018). Sustainable financing mechanisms and the integration of environmental considerations, such as ecosystem conservation and climate change adaptation, are critical for long-term resilience and equitable development. By reflecting on these lessons, stakeholders in the Kura-Aras River Basin can enhance their institutional frameworks and collaboration, advancing towards sustainable and equitable water management.

To tackle infrastructure vulnerability, the proposed structure prioritizes investments in resilient infrastructure, incorporating modern technologies and engineering practices to mitigate risks of failure and ensure reliable water management systems. Economic pressures are addressed through policies that promote sustainable resource use and equitable allocation, fostering a balance between competing demands while supporting livelihoods and economic development. Ecological degradation is combated through integrated ecosystem management approaches, including habitat restoration, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable land use practices that enhance ecosystem resilience and ecosystem services provision (Abbasov and Flores 2023). Moreover, proactive measures are implemented to mitigate and adapt to climate change impacts, such as developing climate-resilient infrastructure, implementing adaptive water management strategies, and promoting ecosystem-based adaptation measures. Water scarcity is addressed through enhanced water efficiency measures, investment in alternative water sources, and collaborative water-sharing agreements among riparian states. Pollution and contamination are tackled through stricter regulations, improved monitoring and enforcement mechanisms, and investment in wastewater treatment infrastructure. Bureaucratic red tape is minimized through streamlining administrative procedures, enhancing inter-agency coordination, and promoting transparency and accountability in decision-making processes. Finally, transboundary disputes are addressed through diplomatic negotiations, mediation, and the establishment of joint management mechanisms, fostering cooperation and conflict resolution among riparian states to ensure equitable and sustainable management of the Kura-Aras River Basin. Through these measures, the proposed institutional structure and recommendations strive to transform weaknesses and threats into strengths and opportunities, promoting the long-term resilience and sustainability of the basin's ecosystems and communities.

Stakeholders must prioritize the establishment of trust amongst themselves to create an effective and equitable legal and regulatory framework. Trust is foundational for fostering cooperation, collaboration, and mutual understanding among diverse stakeholders, including governments, local communities, and non-governmental organizations (Sharipova 2023). Building trust requires transparent communication, active engagement, and a commitment to shared goals and values. Moreover, trust-building efforts must be accompanied by the development of a robust legal and regulatory framework that ensures fairness, accountability, and inclusivity in water resource management practices. Such a framework should address issues of water allocation, usage rights, pollution control, and dispute-resolution mechanisms in a manner that reflects the needs and interests of all stakeholders. In the World, nearly half of the basin organizations, totaling 63 out of 127, have defined dispute-resolution mechanisms in place to address any disagreements among member states as outlined in treaties (Schmeier 2024). By enhancing trust and establishing a comprehensive legal and regulatory framework, the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin can effectively address complex water management challenges and promote sustainable development and equitable resource distribution for present and future generations.

Data exchange, shared experience, and collaboration among stakeholders, including government agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and local communities, are paramount in the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin for effective water resource management. Scholars have claimed that data and information exchange at the river basin layer is necessary for effective river basin development and administration (Gerlak et al. 2011, Meijerink and Huitema 2017). The inclusion of these stakeholders in the proposed institutional structure is vital as it ensures a holistic and participatory approach to decision-making and implementation processes. Government agencies possess valuable data and expertise regarding water management policies, regulations, and infrastructure, which can inform evidence-based decision-making within the basin. NGOs often bring specialized knowledge, community engagement strategies, and innovative solutions to water resource challenges, enriching the institutional framework with diverse perspectives and approaches. Local communities, as primary users and stewards of water resources, provide invaluable insights into local needs, priorities, and traditional knowledge, fostering ownership and sustainability of management initiatives. By facilitating data exchange and collaboration among these stakeholders within the proposed institutional structure, the Kura-Aras River Basin can harness collective expertise, resources, and support to address complex water management issues effectively and promote long-term resilience and equitable development.

International funders, notably international agencies and multilateral development organizations have frequently played a significant role in encouraging collaboration and ensuring the long-term viability of joint river basin administration (Schulze and Schmeier 2012). The involvement of international funders also helps to improve technical capacity by providing resources for training, technology transfer, and infrastructure development within the Kura-Aras River Basin. The need for third-party involvement in arranging effective institutionalization in the Kura-Aras River Basin stems from several critical factors. Firstly, the basin spans multiple countries with diverse political, cultural, and socio-economic contexts, making cooperation among riparian states inherently complex. Third-party facilitation can provide a neutral platform for dialogue and negotiation, helping to overcome barriers related to trust, sovereignty concerns, and historical tensions. Additionally, third parties often bring expertise in institutional design and resource management, which are essential for developing robust governance mechanisms tailored to the unique needs of the basin. Moreover, third-party involvement can enhance accountability and transparency in decision-making processes, reducing the likelihood of unilateral actions or disputes over water allocations.

One of the most noticeable features of river basin organizations is their membership system. The basis for recognizing the membership structure's impact on adaptation is the trade-off between decision-making and management efficiency, and the necessity to involve all riparians in the watercourse to be able to assure IWRM across actors (Kliot et al. 2001, Mostert 2003, Goh 2007, Gerlak and Grant 2009). The application of a river basin organization (RBO) membership system in the Kura-Aras River Basin holds significant potential for enhancing collaborative water management efforts among riparian states. By adopting a membership system, the basin can establish a formalized structure for cooperation, where participating countries actively engage in decision-making processes, resource allocation, and conflict resolution mechanisms. Through membership, each riparian state gains a stake in the sustainable management of the basin's water resources, fostering a sense of ownership and commitment to shared goals. Furthermore, a membership system allows for the integration of diverse perspectives, expertise, and resources from member countries, maximizing the effectiveness of water management initiatives. This inclusive approach facilitates the exchange of knowledge, technology, and best practices, promoting innovation and capacity building within the basin. Moreover, a membership system provides a platform for regular communication, collaboration, and trust-building among riparian states, essential elements for addressing common challenges and achieving equitable and sustainable water management outcomes in the Kura-Aras River Basin.

Now, the research shifts its focus to the conclusion section, where findings from the exploration of institutionalization efforts and transboundary dynamics in various river basins will be synthesized to provide insights into sustainable water management practices in the Kura-Aras context.

8. Conclusion

The research explored how successful institutionalization efforts in other transboundary river basins could offer valuable insights applicable to the context of the Kura-Aras River Basin, while also examining the impacts of transboundary issues and conflicts on the institutionalization process of water resources management within the basin. By investigating the experiences of other river basins where effective institutional frameworks had been established, this study aimed to extract valuable insights and lessons that could have informed the development of sustainable water management practices in the Kura-Aras River Basin context. Additionally, the research sought to shed light on the challenges posed by transboundary issues and conflicts, understanding their implications for the establishment and functioning of institutional structures governing water resources within the basin.

Research has identified shared goals and transboundary collaboration as significant strengths of the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin, enabling coordinated efforts among riparian states towards sustainable water management. These strengths facilitate mutual understanding, resource sharing, and joint decision-making, ultimately enhancing the resilience and effectiveness of basin-wide initiatives. The study, primarily focusing on input from field experts, has identified historical disputes, a lack of trust among stakeholders, and insufficient financial and technical capacity as significant weaknesses in the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin. These challenges hinder effective collaboration and decision-making, impeding progress towards sustainable water management and environmental protection goals. Results indicate significant opportunities within the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin, including the enhancement of climate resilience, fostering public participation and stakeholder engagement, and stimulating economic development through targeted investment. Leveraging these opportunities can lead to more robust management strategies, improved community involvement, and sustainable growth within the basin. Findings identify significant opportunities in addressing climate change impacts, infrastructure vulnerability, and economic pressures within the institutionalization of the Kura-Aras River Basin. By implementing adaptive measures, enhancing infrastructure resilience, and promoting sustainable economic practices, the basin can mitigate risks, build resilience, and foster sustainable development in the face of evolving challenges.

This article presents a significant step forward in understanding the complexities of water resource management in transboundary river basins. Building upon this work, future research directions could explore the scalability of the institutional framework developed for the Kura-Aras River Basin to other regions facing similar challenges. Additionally, scholars may investigate the role of technology, such as remote sensing and data analytics, in enhancing water resource management effectiveness within the basin. Furthermore, there is a need to delve deeper into the socio-economic and political dynamics influencing institutional arrangements, including stakeholder engagement and conflict resolution mechanisms. Longitudinal studies tracking the implementation and outcomes of the established institutional structures would provide valuable insights into their adaptive capacity and resilience in the face of evolving environmental and socio-economic conditions. Lastly, interdisciplinary approaches integrating perspectives from hydrology, economics, sociology, and political science could enrich our understanding of the multifaceted nature of water governance in transboundary river basins, thereby contributing to more sustainable and equitable water management practices globally.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 International Rhine Commission https://www.iksr.org/en/icpr/about-us (accessed on 13 May 2024)

2 Kura-Aras River Basin Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis https://www.ais.unwater.org/ais/aiscm/getprojectdoc.php?docid = 771 (accessed on 27 February 2024)

3 Adaptation to Climate Change in the Kura-Aras River Basin https://iwlearn.net/resolveuid/166c61b7bbfc4def7dffa12d5102d4b3 (accessed on 11 February 2024)

4 Water, growth and finance, Policy Perspectives https://www.oecd.org/environment/resources/Water-Growth-and-Finance-policy-perspectives.pdf (accessed on 13 May 2024)

5 AQUEDUCT Water Risk Atlas https://www.wri.org/applications/aqueduct/water-risk-atlas/#/?advanced = false&basemap = hydro&geoStore = 0103742d088cc8b722ac444ed9163f79&indicator = w_awr_def_tot_cat&lat = 38.40482032044053&lng = 50.507811605930335&mapMode = view&month = 1&opacity = 0.5&ponderation = DEF&predefined = false&projection = absolute&scenario = optimistic&scope = baseline&threshold = 25&timeScale = annual&year = baseline&zoom = 5 (accessed on 14 May 2024)

6 Ibid

7 Environment and Water Resource Protection: Measures to Modernize Water Infrastructure in the South Caucasus https://www.sustainerasolutions.com/images/954764e0-b5a1-464c-9771-37a3974bb694-RAHMENANALYSE%20English%20Final.pdf (accessed on 12 May 2024)

8 Iran, Azerbaijan to inaugurate storage dam at common border https://english.news.cn/20240316/49e38f11595540928b97b76700c57e0e/c.html (accessed on 18 March 2024)

Iran, Azerbaijan Continue Construction of Khudafarin and Giz Galasi Hydro Junctions https://blacksea-caspia.eu/en/iran-azerbaijan-continue-construction-khudafarin-and-giz-galasi-hydro-junctions (accessed on 4 March 2024)

Iran, Armenia to monitor and diminish pollution in Aras River https://iranpress.com/iran--armenia-to-monitor-and-diminish-pollution-in-aras-river (accessed on 9 March 2024)

9 Azerbaijan, Georgia Make Progress Towards the Joint Sustainable Management of Kura River https://sdg.iisd.org/news/azerbaijan-georgia-make-progress-towards-the-joint-sustainable-management-of-kura-river/ (accessed on 7 February 2024)

10 Strengthening Armenia-Georgia Collaboration in Groundwater Monitoring https://eu4waterdata.eu/en/blog-news/54-eap-region/290-strengthening-armenia-georgia-collaboration-in-groundwater-monitoring.html (accessed on 2 February 2024)

George Khanishvili meets the representatives of Turkish Irrigation Company – General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (DSI) https://mepa.gov.ge/En/News/Details/21057 (accessed on 19 February 2024)

11 River Basin Commissions and Other Institutions for Transboundary Water Cooperation https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/water/documents/CWC_publication_joint_bodies.pdf (accessed on 13 May 2024)

12 Azerbaijan sues Armenia for wartime environmental damage https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/26/azerbaijan-sues-armenia-for-wartime-environmental-damage-bern-convention-biodiversity-aoe (accessed on 13 May 2024)

Report: Investigating the environmental dimensions of the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict https://ceobs.org/investigating-the-environmental-dimensions-of-the-nagorno-karabakh-conflict/ (accessed on 13 May 2024)

13 Water and Climate Change Adaptation in Transboundary Basins: Lessons Learned and Good Practices https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/water/publications/WAT_Good_practices/ece.mp.wat.45.pdf (accessed on 12 May 2024)

14 Reducing Transboundary Degradation in the Kura-Aras Basin https://iwlearn.net/resolveuid/5ed0f3514f4447f4703162c0ca76b1c1 (accessed on 12 May 2024)